The Allahabad High Court, while dismissing an appeal under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services, observed that Section 107 of the Act specifically provides for the limitation and in the absence of any clause condoning the delay by showing sufficient cause after the prescribed period, there is complete exclusion of Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
Brief Facts:
The present petition was filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India after being aggrieved by the order dated January 18, 2022, passed by the appellate authority being the Additional Commissioner, Grade-II (Appeal)-1st, Commercial Tax, Agra under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, wherein the appeal was dismissed as being time-barred.
Observations of the court:
The court noted that the appeal was filed beyond time and when there is no dispute with regard to the filing of the appeal beyond the time prescribed, and the court under the extraordinary jurisdiction cannot interfere with the appellate authority's order as the application of Limitation Act, 1963 does not apply to Section 107 of the Act.
Further, the court referred to the decision in the case of Singh Enterprises v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur and Others wherein the Supreme Court had upheld the High Court's order not condoning the delay in tax cases and holding that the High Court does not have the power to condone the delay under taxation laws.
Further, the court stated that the Central Goods and Services Act is a special statute and a self-contained code by itself. Section 107 of the Act has an inbuilt mechanism and has impliedly excluded the application of the Limitation Act. It is trite law that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 will apply only if it is extended to the special statute. Section 107 of the Act specifically provides for the limitation and in the absence of any clause condoning the delay by showing sufficient cause after the prescribed period, there is complete exclusion of Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Accordingly, one cannot apply Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 to the aforesaid provision.
The decision of the Court:
The court dismissed the petition and upheld the impugned order.
Case Title: M/S Garg Enterprises vs. State of U.P. and Ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Shekhar B. Saraf
Case No.: WRIT TAX No. - 291 of 2022
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. B.K. Singh Raghuvanshi, Mr. Abhishek Gupta
Advocate for the Respondent: C.S.C
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
